Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law

About Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law

Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law podcast (HAPL) is an initiative of EU Twinning Project ALF (“Advancing Cooperation on the Foundations of Law”). ALF is a project coordinated by the Center for Legal Fundamentals of the Faculty of Law University of Belgrade. To know more about the project: https://alf.ius.bg.ac.rs/

Publisher

ALF Project

Category

science

Language

en

Explicit

No

First episode

1 Mar 2024

Latest episode

6 Apr 2026

Latest episodes

12 episodes in the feed.

1. 

   6 Apr 2026

   Episode 12 - Legal Interpretation and the Conversational Model (ft. Francesca Poggi)

   In this episode, we delve into the topic of legal interpretation and its theoretical foundations. What are the core elements of a rigorous account of legal interpretation? How has the conversational model — drawing on ideas about communication and pragmatics — shaped the field in recent decades? What are the main positions within this approach, and who are its key proponents? And if we move away from the conversational paradigm, how should we think about the standards by which an interpretation can be evaluated? Is objectivity in interpretation something we truly need, or can we do without it? Francesca Poggi joins us to explore these questions and to present her own account of legal interpretation. We discuss the appeal and the limitations of grounding legal interpretation in the theory of conversation, examining the structural differences between ordinary communicative exchanges and the interpretation of legal texts. Poggi identifies the key problems with the conversational model and outlines an alternative framework — one that takes seriously the question of how to assess interpretive outcomes once the assumption of objectivity is put under pressure. Francesca Poggi is full professor at the Department in legal science "Cesare Beccaria" at the University of Milan (https://www.unimi.it/en/ugov/person/francesca-poggi), where she coordinates the PhD programme in legal science "Cesare Beccaria". She teaches on numerous Italian and international master's and advanced courses. Her research interests range from general jurisprudence to bioethics and gender legal studies, always with a particular focus on legal interpretation. She has published in international journals such as Jurisprudence, Revus, and Ratio juris, and has co-edited volumes such as ⁠ (https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/usd/research-methods-in-consumer-law-9781785366604.html)Interpretivism and the Limits of Law  (https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/usd/interpretivism-and-the-limits-of-law-9781802209310.html) (Edward Elgar, 2022) and Law and Pragmatics, vol. I (https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-30385-7) and vol. II (https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-44601-1)⁠ (https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783030401672) (Springer, 2016 and 2017). Her latest book is Il modello conversazionale (ETS, 2020). [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:05) Intro – HAPL Podcast (00:00:19) Introduction to the Episode – Hosts and Guest (00:00:56) Francesca Poggi – Academic Path and Research Interests (00:03:32) Main Elements of Poggi's Account of Legal Interpretation (00:09:36) An Open Problem – Why Are There Fewer Judicial Conflicts Than Expected? (00:12:30) The Conversational Model – A Broad Overview (00:17:09) Main Criticisms – Legislative Intention and the Problem of Collective Intentionality (00:20:48) The Indeterminacy of Legal Context vs. Ordinary Conversation (00:24:19) The Core Distinction Between Legal Interpretation and Conversation (00:27:16) Is Legal Interpretation Ever Cooperative? (00:31:21) Objectivity in Legal Interpretation – Is It Possible or Necessary? (00:33:55) Evaluating Interpretations Without Objectivity – The "Never-Ending Dance" (00:37:44) Legal Culture, Values, and Constraints on Judicial Discretion (00:41:38) Realism Is Not Arbitrariness – Determinants of Interpretive Convergence (00:44:37) Constitutionalized Legal Systems and the Failure of the Conversational Model (00:56:22) Democratic Consequences – Does This Picture Threaten the Rule of Law? (00:59:51) The Ideal Legislator Dogma and Its Modern Reincarnation as the Competent Speaker Model (01:05:00) Connection Between the Competent Speaker Model and the Conversational Approach (01:06:05) Closing Remarks and Farewell (01:07:05) Outro – HAPL Podcast

2. 

   4 Feb 2026

   Episode 11 - Economic Analysis of Law (ft. Fabrizio Esposito)

   In this episode, we delve into the topic of the foundations of the economic analysis of law. Where do we stand nowadays in law and economics? How has the field evolved from the classical economic analysis of law to the rise of law and political economy? Is there room for a “limping third way” between these approaches? What are the main methodological problems shaping the field today: unilateralism from economics to law, conceptual simplifications, or institutional pressures within academia? What could a true reconciliation between legal reasoning and economic analysis look like? Fabrizio Esposito joins us to explore these questions and to outline possible paths forward for the discipline. We discuss the evolution and internal divisions of law and economics, the growing distance between theory and practice, and the methodological challenges that hinder interdisciplinary dialogue. Esposito proposes a “fitness-based bilateralism” that bridges empirical and normative inquiry through comparative, inferentialist methods, while also emphasizing the need to revive minoritarian and “third way” perspectives that bring law and economics closer to the realities of legal reasoning and institutional choice. Fabrizio Esposito is an Associate Professor of Private Law at NOVA School of Law (https://novalaw.unl.pt/en/fabrizio-esposito/#_#nota-biografica)(Lisbon). At NOVA, he co-coordinates the Master’s in Law Applied to Technology (https://novalaw.unl.pt/en/masters-program-in-law-applied-to-technology-law-and-tech/) (Law & Tech) and the Data-Driven Law Knowledge Centre (https://novalaw.unl.pt/en/nova-data-driven-law/), and he is also Librarian Professor and a member of the NOVA Consumer Lab (https://novaconsumerlab.fd.unl.pt/). Outside NOVA, he coordinates the MetaLawEcon network (https://metalawecon.wixsite.com/metalawecon/about-metalawecon) and works as an analyst for EU Law Live. His research sits at the intersection of private law, EU economic law, law & economics, and legal theory, with particular attention to how consumer law, data protection, competition law, and sector-specific regulation respond to technological change in the “attention economy.” Current strands of work include price personalization and theories of harm in consumer law, especially where consumer data is involved. He has published in international journals such as Computer Law & Security Review, European Review of Contract Law, and the Journal of Consumer Policy, and has co-edited volumes such as Research Methods in Consumer Law (https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/usd/research-methods-in-consumer-law-9781785366604.html) (Edward Elgar, 2018) and Economics in Legal Reasoning (https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783030401672) (Palgrave, 2020). [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:00) Intro – HAPL Podcast (00:00:16) Introduction to the Episode – Hosts and Guest (00:01:12) Fabrizio Esposito – Academic Genealogy and Research Interests (00:07:49) Where Do We Stand in Law and Economics? (00:17:20) Economic Analysis of Law vs. Law and Political Economy vs. the Limping Third Way (00:17:43) Clarifying What “Law and Political Economy” Really Means (00:19:35) Interdisciplinarity Problems – Economists, Lawyers, and Institutional Barriers (00:22:21) Theory and Practice – Are Legal Philosophers Also Guilty of Disconnection? (00:30:41) Balancing, Proportionality, and the Use of Economic Concepts in Law (00:36:13) Constitutional Adjudication and the Limits of Economic Analysis (00:38:04) Methodological Underpinnings – From Descriptive Models to Foundationalism (00:45:20) What Are the Methodological Problems in Law and Economics? (00:57:29) Institutionalization and the Academic Detachment Problem (01:04:09) What Is the Way Forward? ‘Fitness-Based’ Bilateralist & Institutional Solutions (01:18:20) The Role of Abstraction and the Value of Theory (01:26:40) Normativity in Law and Economics (01:36:15) Exploring the Third Way and Minoritarian Views (01:43:10) Legal Education and Institutional Reform (01:46:22) Teaching Across Disciplines – Law, Philosophy, and Economics (01:50:45) Realism and Optimism About the Future of Law and Economics (01:54:02) Farewell Reflections – Interdisciplinarity and Academic Change (01:57:10) Outro – HAPL Podcast

3. 

   15 Sept 2025

   Episode 10 - Experimental Jurisprudence (ft. Izabela Skoczeń)

   In this episode, we delve into the debate about experimental jurisprudence (also known as xJur). What is exactly “experimental jurisprudence”? What is in turn “experimental philosophy”? What are the methods of xJur and what are the good practices in order to get replicable results? Can we truly achieve knowledge on law through experiments? Izabela Skoczeń discusses with us the raising in importance of experimental jurisprudence in the last years, how it fits within the underlying assumptions in philosophy and jurisprudence related to law, and the criticisms that have been formulated towards it. We explore first a general introduction to both experimental jurisprudence and experimental philosophy, as well as the array of methods used by the former and an overview of the applicable good practices. We then address some of the criticisms formulated towards xJur, arguing for the ecological validity of xjur, arguing why xjur is helpful, also when focused on non-expert understanding of concepts, and why a short scenario can shed light on complex conceptual issues.  Finally, we close the episode exploring the role of xJur in conceptual analysis and the challenge of conflicting intuitions. Izabela Skoczeń is an assistant professor at the Law Faculty of the Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland. Her work focuses on the intersection of legal theory, experimental jurisprudence and philosophy of language. She is a member of the Jagiellonian Centre for Law, Language and Philosophy (https://pjf.uj.edu.pl/en_GB/start), a member of the editorial board of the Bloomsbury series ‘Advances in Experimental Philosophy (https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/series/advances-in-experimental-philosophy/)’, and a contributing editor of the jurisprudence section of Jotwell (https://juris.jotwell.com/?_gl=1*tgfpmq*_ga*MTU4NzY1OTkzLjE3NTUzNzg4NzI.*_ga_BXXRV43J3Z*czE3NTczNjk2MDIkbzEwJGcxJHQxNzU3MzY5NjAyJGo2MCRsMCRoMA..). She is currently working on a project on devising principles for responsible LLM communication with partners from Austria, Romania and Switzerland: https://talkingtobots.net (https://talkingtobots.net/) . She is also working on a project on cross-cultural replications of experimental jurisprudence studies, together with K Tobia (https://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/kevin-tobia/) and J L Nunes (https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=8V-ZZZEAAAAJ&hl=pt-BR). She has published in Synthese (Renouncing the attempt versus perpetration distinction (https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s11229-022-04000-6?sharing_token=Gkr5opH0NtfkhQlqm0CQcPe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY7-Nx9tfd0L6FCi20h6nb-ymraa7xJN_56Y6R8oGT-W975D4Bnhd7yqoP9G4ELwV4SnbVBDkCHgkj5-2Bj-nZxMxvG1TI7QadupnGRC6wJzD9ANwgw4fdasuDotSF17JD0%3D), 2023), Bloomsbury (chapter: From lying to blaming and perjury: deceptive implicatures in the courtroom and the materiality requirement (https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/monograph-detail?docid=b-9781350377837&pdfid=9781350377837.ch-9.pdf&tocid=b-9781350377837-chapter9), 2025), Cognition (Outcome effects, moral luck and hindsight bias, (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027722002463?via%3Dihub) 2023, with M Kneer (https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6dFvixUAAAAJ&hl=en)), the Leiden Journal of International Law (Inside the treaty interpreter’s mind: An experimental linguistic approach to international law (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/inside-the-treaty-interpreters-mind-an-experimental-linguistic-approach-to-international-law/FE6A4942DA2079173889B2D310C3542A?fbclid=IwAR0gZyG6FAbgRLPYbruCaaUWmvVkpJ58RY2y7axKwAfQeUNichfQipghSzQ#.ZEbfwjUtD5c.twitter), 2023, with B Pirker (https://scholar.google.pl/citations?user=EWofVzoAAAAJ&hl=pl)), Ratio Juris (Delimiting Legal Interpretation: The Problem of Moral Bias and Political Distortion—The Case of Criminal Intention (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/raju.12344?fbclid=IwAR0XQqeHnaVd4aAidUbD2Fhgic-ZjIcsOljNrgsY_NY-bhoVuckZOOnhNdg), 2022, with F Poggi (https://www.unimi.it/it/ugov/person/francesca-poggi)), the International Journal for the Semiotics of Law (Modelling Perjury: Between Trust and Blame (https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s11196-021-09818-w?sharing_token=ePVViLy8MYOsqtZAa4xtKfe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY4XbPk65REMCE1Ui1ZE5ea1b_V9iWHEO0l-Z8ptHw_hpXW18P6dOf-25VQvIn-TaNm_HzHZx_-ohEEx2-cWYE04o_sBSdQR7SHr-few3E_89WmhnZRC4ObRywxKqlNDYU0%3D), 2021), Oxford University Press (chapter: Is a Legal Implicature in the Eye of its Beholder? (https://global.oup.com/academic/product/language-and-legal-interpretation-in-international-law-9780190855208?cc=pl&lang=en&), 2022). She has authored a monograph, Implicatures within Legal Language (https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-12532-5), in 2019, in the Springer Law and Philosophy Library. Overviews of xJur work mentioned: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on experimental jurisprudence (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/experimental-jurisprudence/) by K Tobia, G Almeida, K Prochownik and I Hannikainen The Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Jurisprudence (https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-experimental-jurisprudence/15186215E870AD1C501AB4A79BEDFB6C) ed by K Tobia Overview article by K Tobia (https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol89/iss3/3/) Overview article by R Sommers (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abf0711) Overview article by K Prochownik (https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phc3.12791) [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:00) Intro HAPL (00:00:18) Introduction to the episode – hosts and guest (00:00:58) Izabela Skoczeń – Academic Genealogy and Research Interests (00:05:04) Experimental Jurisprudence (xJur) – What exactly is it? (00:12:32) xJur and Experimental Philosophy (00:27:49) An Underlying Assumption – does law deal with facts? (00:33:53) Methods of xJur & Replicability (00:45:54) Some Criticisms Formulated Towards xJur (00:54:42) xJur & Conceptual Analysis - The Challenge of conflicting intuitions (01:11:02) Farewell and last words (01:15:34) Outro HAPL

4. 

   2 Jun 2025

   Episode 9 - Responsibility for Negligence in Ethics and Law (ft. Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco)

   Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco discusses responsibility for negligence in ethics and law, exploring ancient and contemporary philosophy of action, practical reason, and private law theory in this interview.

5. 

   6 May 2025

   Episode 8 - Legal validity and concept-construction methodology (fr. Mathieu Carpentier)

   In this episode, we delve into the debate about legal validity and concept-construction methodology. What is exactly legal validity? What would be the most adequate way to construct a concept of legal validity? How is the idea of cluster concepts important for this debate? Do theoretical or conceptual distinctions have any practical relevance? Mathieu Carpentier discussed with us why legal validity is a key concept for legal theory and why it is better understood as a cluster concept, broken down into more elementary units of meaning. We explore first how – and why – acluster concept-construction methodology is more useful than other methodologies and then explore in-depth the elementary units Carpentier identify related to the concept of legal validity, as well as the internal relations among theseunits. Finally, touch upon the impact of all of these on the definition of the rule of recognition, and the relevance of this discussion and distinctions to legal positivism (including the inclusive and exclusive legal positivism debate). Mathieu Carpentier is a Professor of Public Lawat the University of Toulouse Capitole and a Fellow of the Institut universitaire de France. He works on various issues in legal philosophy as well as constitutional law and theory and comparative constitutional law. His PhD thesis was devoted to legal defeasibility (it was published in French in 2014).He recently edited a book called “Meta-Theory of Law” (ISTE/Wiley, 2022). He has written around 50 papers in French and English. Listeners wanting to dive deeper in his work on legalvalidity, concept-construction and the methodology of jurisprudence can check some of his papers on SSRN: Sources and Validity (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3028686) (2018), Validity and Applicability: A Small Dose of Scepticism (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3136983)(2018), Kelsen on Derogation and Normative Conflicts (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3588035) (2020), Sources of Law (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4059278) (with Torben Spaak, 2024), Against “Legal Facts” (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4790880) (forthcoming 2025). French readers may also consult his Problèmes relatifs à l'identification temporelle des systèmesjuridiques (https://www.academia.edu/95401501/Probl%C3%A8mes_relatifs_%C3%A0_lidentification_temporelle_des_syst%C3%A8mes_juridiques) (2023) and Controverses sur la “nature” du droit (https://www.droitphilosophie.com/articles/controverses-sur-la-nature-du-droit-:-enjeux-theoriques-et-methodologiques-1684) (2018). [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:00) Intro HAPL (00:00:16) Introduction to the episode – hosts and guest (00:01:30) Mathieu Carpentier – Academic Genealogy and Research Interests (00:06:24) Legal Theory and Philosophy in France (00:19:05) Legal Validity – Concept, Classical View, Importance for Legal Theory and Philosophy (00:27:49) Legal Validity & Adequate Methodology of Concept-Construction (00:32:50) Legal Validity as a Cluster Concept (00:40:21) Legal Validity and its Units of Meaning (an Introduction) (00:55:50) Legal Validity and the Concept of Legal System (01:00:58) Legal Validity and its Units of Meaning – On Efficacy and Relation between Units (01:09:24) Legal Validity and the Rule of Recognition (01:21:31) Adequate Methodology of Conceptual Analysis and Concept-Construction (01:30:22) Farewell and last words (01:32:49) Outro HAPL

6. 

   7 Feb 2025

   Episode 7 - The debate on rules & principles, genericity and categorisation (fr. Pedro Moniz Lopes)

   In this episode, we delve into the debate on rules and principles, the topic of law and categorisation, and the connection between equality (and analogy). Why the obsession in philosophy of law with the rules/principles debate? Is the distinction purely definitional or also substantial? How is the element of genericity – not generality - important for the debate? Does equality have something to do here? And analogy? Pedro Moniz Lopes discusses with us why the distinction between rules and principles is better understood as a strong distinction, different of the kind proposed by Robert Alexy. This strong distinction is based on the key criterion of genericity – that is, based on the specificity of the action that is being governed by the norm. We explore how categorisation might not be purely didactical or pedagogical and its role in allowing us to anticipate the way entities behave in reality, the possible parallels between principles in law and causal forces in the natural world in regards to explanation, how equality factors in the discussion regarding genericity and principles, and how analogy enters the picture. Pedro Moniz Lopes is an Assistant Professor of Legal Philosophy and Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Lisbon. He co-heads “Lisbon Legal Theory” and is a Senior Fellow of the Lisbon Public Law Research Centre (https://lisbonpubliclaw.pt/en/lisbon-legal-theory/⁠) in which he coordinates research activities in the field legal theory and legal philosophy.  Pedro has also been the Executive Director of e-Publica – Public Law Journal (https://e-publica.pt/⁠) for the past 10 years. His current research interests are constitutional equality and analogical reasoning, linguistic and logical accounts of generic norm sentences and marginal utility of fundamental rights. Pedro’s work is mostly available at his academia page: https://pedromonizlopes.academia.edu/ (https://pedromonizlopes.academia.edu/) [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos] (00:00:00) Intro HAPL (00:00:18) Introduction to the episode (00:01:09) Pedro Moniz Lopes – Academic Genealogy and Research Interests (00:07:07) Research Groups – Lisbon Legal Theory and History (00:13:54) Rules & principles: Arrival to the Distinction and Criteria for Distinguishing (00:26:12) Rules & principles: what entities are they? How does this connect with the issue of categorisation? (00:32:28) Genericity as the distinction criterion between rules & principles (00:48:04) The role of equality in the discussion on categorisation & rules and principles (01:00:24) Equality and analogy: similarities and differences (01:08:55) How to Frame the Discussions regarding Rules & Principles: from the Legal System to Legal Practitioners (01:16:58) Farewell and last words (01:21:00) Outro HAPL

7. 

   11 Dec 2024

   Episode 6 - Non-human agents and the construction of legal reality

   Antonia M. Waltermann, assistant professor of legal theory, explores non-human agency and its implications for the social construction of legal reality and education.

8. 

   13 Nov 2024

   Episode 5 - The Nature of International Law (ft. Miodrag Jovanović)

   In this episode, we delve into the encompassing topic of international law, exploring it through the eyes of philosophy of law. Can our conceptions of law encompass international law? Is there something akin of a nature of international law? What would be the main elements to determine such a nature? Miodrag Jovanović discusses why there has been a historical lack of philosophical interest in international law, and then delves into the analysis of the possibility to identify a nature of international law and its elements. We also explore how the choice of methodological perspective changes the approach to the existence and content of such nature, the properties of coercion and justice appness of international law, and inquire about the emergence of global law as a phenomenom and a field of study. Miodrag A. Jovanović is a Full Professor in Jurisprudence, at the Faculty of Law, University of Belgrade. He also teaches at the Legal Methods module of the European Master in Legal Theory, at the Goethe University, Frankfurt. He is a fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and the 2016 Brandon Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (Cambridge). His internationally published books include Constitutionalizing Secession in Federalized States: A Procedural Approach (Eleven International Publishing, 2007), Collective Rights – A Legal Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2012), and Unpacking Normativity – Conceptual, Normative and Descriptive Issues (co-edited with Kenneth Einar Himma and Bojan Spaić) (Hart Publishing, 2018) In you want to dive deeper into the topic of the nature of international law and philosophy of international law, you can check Miodrag’s book “⁠The Nature of International Law⁠ (https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108608060)” (Cambridge University Press, 2019). [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

9. 

   14 Oct 2024

   Episode 4: Evidential Reasoning & Evidence Law (Giovanni Tuzet)

   The guest for this fourth episode of the HAPL podcast is Giovanni Tuzet, currently Full Professor of Philosophy of Law at Bocconi University (Milan, Italy). In the first part of this interview with Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić, Tuzet talks about his academic path to the present and introduces the topic of evidential reasoning, starting from the most general question about legal reasoning and moving towards evidential reasoning and evidence law. He analyses the similarities and differences between evidential reasoning and other domains of factual reasoning, and explains different criteria for admissible evidence in law and those other domains. In the second part of the interview, Tuzet discusses his approach to the relation of truth and evidence (developed in his recent book “La prova ragionata”) and its differences with other approaches. The debate goes on to touch admissibility of evidence, evaluation criteria, and standards of proof, evidence and inference, probabilism and control of the inferences, artificial intelligence and evidential reasoning, and much more. (00:00:00) HAPL Intro (00:00:18) Introduction – Welcome to Giovanni Tuzet & Academic Genealogy (00:05:52) A general account of legal reasoning (00:10:47) Reasoning & Argumentation: public and private aspects of reasoning (00:13:00) Legal Reasoning & Inferentialism (00:19:06) Evidential Reasoning in Law and in Other Domains (00:27:25) ER: Admissibility of Evidence in Law – general concept (00:33:32) ER: Truth and Evidence in “La prova ragionata” (Giuffre, 2023) (00:39:54) ER: Admissibility of Evidence in Law – criteria of admissibility and exclusion (00:46:37) ER: Evidence & Inference (ft. Sherlock Holmes) (01:01:53) ER: Probabilism & Control of the results of ER (01:13:58) ER & Artificial Intelligence – limits and possibilities (01:20:44) ER: Standards of Proof (01:30:23) ER & Artificial Intelligence – would an AI have convicted OJ Simpson? (01:35:06) Interview end – Farewell to Giovanni Tuzet (01:36:58) HAPL Outro [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

10. 

    6 May 2024

    Episode 3: Artificial Intelligence and Legal Theory (Domingos Farinho)

    The guest for this third episode of the HAPL podcast is Domingos Soares Farinho, currently professor auxiliar at the Faculdade de Direito of the Universidade de Lisboa, member of the Centro de Investigação em Direito Público (CIDP) do Instituto de Ciências Jurídico-Políticas da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa, and member of Lisbon’s ALF team. In the first part of this highly interactive interview with Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić, Farinho introduces his academic genealogy and discusses with the hosts about the relation between legal theory and legal practice, focusing on Portugal’s experience on the matter and his personal experience as a practitioner. In the second part of the interview, Farinho discusses with the hosts about the relation and influence between technology development, law, and philosophy of law. The debate goes on to touch upon regulation of digital content, artificial intelligence, science fiction, production of texts by artificial intelligence, autonomy and liability, criteria for legal personhood, and much more. (00:00:00) HAPL Introduction (00:00:15) Interview Introduction – Welcome to Domingos Farinho (& General Rumbling) (00:04:25) Academic Genealogy and Non-Academic Experience (00:12:57) Relationship between Legal Theory and Legal Practice: Portugal’s experience (00:29:20) Relationship between Legal Theory and Legal Practice: Farinho’s experience (00:37:38) Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms and Autonomy (00:53:49) When does AI Matter to Law? Embodied Artificial Intelligence and the Possibility of Lawyer’s Replacement (01:09:27) Artificial Intelligence, Legal Personhood, and Science Fiction (01:23:41) Artificial Intelligence, Autonomy, and Liability (01:52:29) Interview end – Farewell to Domingos Farinho (01:53:16) HAPL Outro [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

11. 

    21 Mar 2024

    Episode 2: Habits and the Law (Marco Segatti)

    The guest for this second episode of the HAPL podcast is Marco Segatti, currently senior researcher at the Tarello Institute for Legal Philosophy – University of Genoa and member of UNIGE’s ALF team. In the first part of this highly interactive interview with Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić, Segatti first introduces his academic genealogy and discusses with the hosts about the high importance of research groups for academy and the potential societal impact of philosophy and its branches. Then, he discusses about research methodology and his preferred topics of research. In the second part of the interview, Segatti discusses with the hosts about Habits and the Law, and his research towards a new definition of habits. The debate goes on to touch upon the relation between habits, behaviours, and the explanation of (social) rules, to finally conclude on the interactions between habits and rules. (00:00:00) HAPL Introduction (00:00:24) Interview Introduction – Welcome to Marco Segatti (& General Rumbling) (00:04:18) Academic Genealogy, Importance of Research Groups & Societal Impact of Philosophy (00:24:50) Research Methodology and Preferred Topics of Research (00:43:16) Habits and the Law: towards a new definition of habits (01:10:59) Habits, Behaviours, and the Explanation of (Social) Rules (01:27:37) Interaction between Habits and Rules (01:50:58) Interview end – Farewell to Marco Segatti (01:51:46) HAPL Outro Follow the ALF Project on social media: - Facebook | ⁠https://www.facebook.com/ALF.AdvancingCooperationOnTheFoundationsOfLaw⁠ - Instagram | ⁠https://www.instagram.com/alfhorizon/⁠ - X (ex-Twitter) | https://twitter.com/ALFHorizon⁠ - Youtube | ⁠https://www.youtube.com/@alfhorizon9951⁠ [This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and Bojan Spaić; edited by Bojan Spaić; uploaded and formatted by Julieta Rabanos]

12. 

    1 Mar 2024

    Episode 1: Threats and challenges to the Rule of Law (Gerald J. Postema's "Law's Rule")

    The guest for this first episode of the HAPL podcast is Gerald J. Postema (https://philosophy.unc.edu/people/gerald-j-postema/), Cary C. Boshamer Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In conversation with Julieta Rabanos, he discusses his last book “Law’s Rule: The Nature, Value, and Viability of the Rule of Law (https://global.oup.com/academic/product/laws-rule-9780190645342)” (OUP, 2022), paying particular attention to his conception of the Rule of Law and how to address both the threats and the challenges he identifies regarding the Rule of Law. In the final part of the conversation, Postema discusses one of the questions posited in the last chapters of the book: “AI in the Law or AI in the Place of Law?” This episode was hosted by Julieta Rabanos and edited by Bojan Spaić. Follow the ALF Project on social media: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ALF.AdvancingCooperationOnTheFoundationsOfLaw (https://www.facebook.com/ALF.AdvancingCooperationOnTheFoundationsOfLaw) Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alfhorizon/ (https://www.instagram.com/alfhorizon/) X (ex-Twitter): https://twitter.com/ALFHorizon (https://twitter.com/ALFHorizon) Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@alfhorizon9951 (https://www.youtube.com/@alfhorizon9951) (PS: Sorry for the audio - we will make it better next time!)

Reach and audience

Public platform figures. Ratings count people who left a rating, not total listeners.

Apple Podcasts (US)

5.0 / 5

1 ratings

Spotify

5.0 / 5

5 ratings

Podcast Authority Score: 32 / 100

A composite of feed quality, social presence, YouTube performance and engagement. Read the methodology.

Quality

40

Social presence

0

YouTube

0

Engagement

60

Contact Heavily Accented Philosophy of Law

Guest appearances

Books guests

Based on episode analysis; this does not confirm that the show is currently accepting guests.